Buying Attention

[0] This is Hidden Brain.

[1] I'm Shankar Vedantam.

[2] As you listen right now to this podcast, you're probably surrounded by stuff.

[3] Tangled earbuds, half -empty water bottle, legos scattered on the floor, a bike.

[4] Try to remember what made you buy all these things.

[5] Hello, Motto.

[6] It's time to reimagine the clothes.

[7] Sketchers shape us.

[8] Step into your nobody.

[9] Get on the holiday road in Honda City.

[10] Newspapers, radio and TV have helped us learn about these products.

[11] But in order to serve up billions of ads, these forms of mass media have had to first create a very special product of their own.

[12] The secret product, you can't buy it in a store, you can't see it, but you are in the process of supplying it at this very second.

[13] This new product, attention, attention, is your attention.

[14] We can lose our freedom and become entrapped really by doing what we're not.

[15] what we think are voluntary choices.

[16] Corporations ranging from Google to Fox News have found ways to grab your attention, package it, and then make money from it.

[17] Their strategies are part of a long legacy of companies trying to capture and monetize our attention.

[18] Columbia University law professor Tim Wu calls these businesses attention merchants.

[19] Today we explore the rise of attention merchants and why Tim says the techniques they've invented pose real risks to our autonomy.

[20] In the early 1800s, the newspaper business in New York City was bleak.

[21] The New York Times wasn't around yet, but there were a handful of other papers, the Journal of Commerce, the Morning Courier in New York Inquirer, they typically charged six cents a copy, which was a lot of money in those days.

[22] Benjamin Day was working in newspaper printing, and he thought the business model needed a reboot.

[23] Six cents was way too much.

[24] He decided to start his own paper, the New York Sun, and sell it, for one cent.

[25] Everyone thought he was crazy, but he knew something that they didn't.

[26] His strategy was one that Jeff Bezos from Amazon could appreciate.

[27] On August 25th, 1835...

[28] Extra, extra, read all about it.

[29] The New York Sun ran a front -page story titled...

[30] Great astronomical discoveries lately made.

[31] Readers learned that an astronomer in South Africa had built a telescope that could see minute details on the surface of the moon.

[32] Over the next few weeks, the Sun released a stream of new findings.

[33] The moon contained canyons, oceans, forests.

[34] The telescope also identified a new form of life.

[35] A creature with a scientific name, Vespotelio Homo.

[36] It looked like a human with batwings.

[37] Here's how the newspaper described the creature.

[38] The averaged four feet in height were covered except on the face with short and glossy copper -colored hair and had wings composed of a thin membrane, without hair, lying snugly upon their backs.

[39] And apparently a ferocious sexual appetite.

[40] Obviously, the paper was peddling fake news.

[41] But that's only obvious to us in the 21st century.

[42] To the average person in 1835, the discovery of moonbats was incredible.

[43] And for the New York Sun...

[44] It carried the paper to unrivaled levels of circulation.

[45] Columbia University law professor Tim Wu has written a book titled The Attention Merchants, where he recounts the history of the many ways our attention has been hijacked.

[46] By selling the newspaper for a penny, Benjamin Day captured market share, and this turned out to produce something much more valuable than New Sprint.

[47] The New York Sun, which published these stories, was the first paper to run entirely on the harvesting of human attention, what we also call an advertising business model.

[48] And so its profits entirely depended, not on its credibility or anything else, but how many readers it had that it could resell.

[49] So that was a crucial historic moment that began the commodification of attention as something very valuable that you could resell and make a lot of money out of.

[50] And that's why I think the paper was driven to stories such as discovering life on the moon so it could build its circulation.

[51] Benjamin Day's business model was a profound discovery.

[52] That model, is alive and well today.

[53] Attention is the fuel that allows everyone from candy makers to car dealers to sell their wares.

[54] In fact, attention is so powerful that once you have it, you can get people to buy things they didn't even know they needed.

[55] Like, for example, mouthwash.

[56] In the 1920s, Listerine came up with one of the first examples of something Tim calls demand engineering.

[57] It was an advertising campaign built around an unfamiliar word.

[58] halitosis.

[59] This dreaded condition, the ad claimed, makes you unpopular.

[60] Yeah, well, you know, I don't think people thought much about whether they had bad breath or not before the 2010s or 1920s.

[61] In that era, a new form of advertising was essentially invented, the goal of which was to engineer demand that did not already necessarily exist.

[62] It was seen as a scientific process done by professionals and necessary to support new products that might otherwise not sell, mouthwash being one of them, a toothpaste being another, people didn't necessarily want them.

[63] The key there is that you could take human attention, which you've harvested to some extent, and then transform it or spin it into gold by engineering new demands.

[64] And that was the magic or the science of advertising in 1920s to make people want things they didn't otherwise want.

[65] So, Tim, I understand that Listerine sales grew from $115 ,000.

[66] to over $8 million as a result of this advertising campaign.

[67] That's right.

[68] And there are abundant examples from the 2010, particularly 1920s, of demand engineering working.

[69] That's what powered, frankly, the growth of something called an advertising industry, which before had really been a marginal industry.

[70] In Listerine, to take a civic example, had previously been used for unclear purposes.

[71] It had been a disinfectant, had been sold as something to clean floors with.

[72] but the invention of it as a mouthwash to cure bad breath was the key to its success.

[73] The attention merchants of the 1920s discovered that they could not only create new norms...

[74] For the teeth that you like, light up a lucky strike.

[75] But they could undo old ones.

[76] One of the most effective campaigns was to undermine the taboo against women smoking.

[77] It was considered unseemly or taboo for a woman.

[78] to smoke in public, or even to smoke at all.

[79] And the tobacco industry, particularly Lucky Strike, took aim of that in two directions.

[80] One was to try to brand cigarettes as a symbol of women's independence and co -branded with the suffragette movement.

[81] They invented this phrase, Torches of Freedom, to refer to the cigarette to show that women were in charge of their own destiny.

[82] And the second, which is a well -tried advertising technique, was to link cigarettes to weight loss.

[83] There's Lucky Strike advertisements in the era that picture, an enormous fat woman and say, is this you in five years, smoke, lucky strikes, or reach for a lucky, not for a sweet.

[84] So they certainly went right at it, and the statistics are dramatic.

[85] They went from very little sales to many millions of cartons being sold to women specifically, and so I think it's one of the most successful examples of demand engineering.

[86] For the taste that you like, light up the lucky strike.

[87] Relax.

[88] It's light up top.

[89] Ninety years ago, you might have heard that Lucky Strike jingle through a new medium that was taking America by storm.

[90] Radio didn't just capture people's attention.

[91] It brought them together.

[92] Families gathered around the fireplace to listen to FDR.

[93] My most immediate concern is in carrying out the purposes of the great work program.

[94] And what the New York Sun did in print, Orson Wells, did on radio.

[95] years of the 20th century.

[96] This opened up new avenues for attention merchants.

[97] Advertisers began sponsoring programs and often slipped the names of companies and products into shows.

[98] Fry, Rinsso, I know you'll join the vast army of women who whistle while they wash. And now, the new Soapy Rich Rinseau presents the new Amos and Andy show.

[99] The communal aspect of radio harnessed attention in a way that newspaper publishers could only dream of.

[100] You know, there were some 19th century, early 20th century writing on the psychology of the crowd.

[101] There was the idea, not exactly contemporary psychology, that people listening to things in mass sort of shed their individual identity and became part of a group which behaved more like an animal.

[102] And, you know, in some ways was entirely wild.

[103] And that was the speculation that we sort of lost it.

[104] I, you know, I think there's some support for that view.

[105] I mean, if you ever been at a sports event or a political rally and you feel you sort of have submerged yourself into a group.

[106] But, you know, it was at that level of theorizing, nothing more scientific than that.

[107] If radio came along and essentially showed that, you know, it could put newspapers to shame, a new product emerged in the 1950s, and it quickly proved that it became the dominant way to capture people's attention.

[108] You say that something extraordinary in the history of the attention merchants happened on Sunday, September 9th, 1996.

[109] Yes, and that is what I label peak attention, otherwise known as Elvis Presley, appearing on the Ed Sullivan show, which registered an audience share, which has never been rivaled.

[110] You know, there have been larger audiences, but the share of the audience has never been quite as large as on that day.

[111] This is probably the greatest honor that I've ever had in my life.

[112] And television, even beyond radio, had shown this incredible capacity to capture the entire nation at one time watching the same information.

[113] You know, in retrospect, it's remarkable.

[114] Think about today how divided people are, how they all listen to their own streams.

[115] The whole nation watching one thing at once is really a product of the mid -century and something that was never equaled before and maybe in some ways never equaled since.

[116] You know, it used to be that for a long time before radio and television that if you wanted people's attention, you actually had to capture it in something that looked like the public square.

[117] Of course, with the advent of radio and television, what you have, as far as the attention merchants are concerned, is an ability to sell things to people even when they're inside their own home.

[118] So the home becomes an opportunity to capture this enormous mind space, if you will, this attention of the nation.

[119] Yes, I think that's a very significant develop.

[120] And one that people in the 20s thought, you know, radio advertisements in the home, no one's going to stand for that.

[121] The home is a sacred place, place for family.

[122] you know, it's impossible to imagine that you'll have acceptance of commercial banter in the home.

[123] Uh -oh, ketchup.

[124] Oh!

[125] I wish somebody would invent a ketchup bottle at squirts where you aim it.

[126] Mrs. Porter, I've got the next best thing.

[127] A new invention from Procter & Gamble.

[128] It absorbs, like magic.

[129] It's called bounty.

[130] The new paper towel that actually attracts moisture.

[131] You know, but it came with a lot of sweeteners.

[132] Elvis Presley, other radio shows, I Love Lucy.

[133] And so we reached a situation where everyone in the United States would faithfully sit down after dinner, watch television, and in the course of that, absorb massive amount of commercial advertising in its most compelling form, namely full sound and full video.

[134] And its remarkable transformation is almost remarkably allowed commerce to intrude in that way, but it fell, as I said, not with a stick but with a carrot.

[135] By the late 1950s, of course, people are recoiling from the amount of advertising they're seeing on television, and a new product emerges to cater to this concern, and this product is the remote control.

[136] The idea is this device is going to allow you freedom to avoid the advertisements, to basically be in charge of your own television watching experience.

[137] Did it do that?

[138] Well, what many people may not know is that the remote control, as you suggested, was born as an ad killer.

[139] It was invented by Zenith.

[140] as a solution to the problem of advertising.

[141] The early versions of the remote control looked like a revolver, a gun, that you would shoot out the ad, I guess basically turning down the volume or switching channels.

[142] And it was marketed as serving the individual.

[143] In the long term, however, and I think most of us have experienced this, I didn't quite have those purposes.

[144] It instead began enabling a different kind of behavior.

[145] Channel surfing, where you sort of sit there and push the button, push the button, push the button, and sometimes for hours on end.

[146] So there's this paradox that sometimes devices designed to liberate us or empower us and enslaving us in completely different ways, mainly because of our weak powers of self -control.

[147] This lack of self -control lies at the very heart of nearly every new invention of the attention merchants.

[148] Even as people try to liberate themselves from one form of mind control, skilled merchants find new ways to undermine people's ability to look away.

[149] One of their biggest victories in this arms race was a discovery of televised sports.

[150] And the turning point for sports was the 1958 National Football League Championships, the game of the greatest game ever played between the Colts and the Giants.

[151] And, you know, it was an incredibly exciting football game.

[152] But more to the point, you know, football had not been watched on TV by large audiences, and no one quite understood to that point just how captivating it was.

[153] It has proven to this day, there's been some weakening, but sports audiences are very loyal.

[154] They're an exceptionally valuable, maybe the most valuable attention harvesting opportunity.

[155] And this is another of TV's inventions in the 1950s.

[156] And I have to say, as a sports fan myself, I find myself sitting through two and a half minutes of ads at the two -minute warning of a game, asking myself, you know, what in God's name am I doing?

[157] But, of course, I keep doing that every Sunday.

[158] It's one of the few times, I think, that the old model of the 50 still has, sway in an era of, you know, streaming and other competitors.

[159] Sports is the Gibraltar of the traditional broadcast model.

[160] And as you said, you know, I like sports too, and I will sit through ads when I would never do it for anything else.

[161] So I think you're right.

[162] As the television networks captured an ever larger share of people's mind space, new entrants found it difficult to compete.

[163] Producing compelling television was expensive.

[164] In 1992, MTV was looking for a way to grab and hold people's attention without spending too much money.

[165] The solution they came up with, pure genius.

[166] This is the true story.

[167] True story.

[168] Seven strangers.

[169] Pick to live in a lot.

[170] And have their lives tape to find out what happens.

[171] What?

[172] When people stop being polite.

[173] Could you get the phone?

[174] And start getting real.

[175] The real world.

[176] Talk about this idea that this was in some ways the discovery of what today we would call reality television.

[177] Yes, no, absolutely.

[178] You know, MTV 90s started to think, well, you know, it could be that the era of Michael Jackson's videos are coming to an end, or Duran Duran, you know, people aren't going to watch videos anymore.

[179] We need something else.

[180] They actually thought about broadcasting football.

[181] They did a game show for a little while, but then someone had the idea that what they really needed was a soap opera.

[182] And as we already suggested, they looked at soap opera and realized that they were far too expensive.

[183] MTV was a run on the cheap.

[184] You know, they had basically no cost other than the VJs who they paid in parties and, you know, some minimal salary.

[185] So they had the idea of getting a bunch of amateurs or regular people together, putting them in a house and then just seeing what happened.

[186] The house was in Soho.

[187] The result was a show called The Real World.

[188] And as you already suggested, it was a founding series of reality television and driven really at bottom by cast cutting, you know, the idea that we needed a show on the cheap.

[189] The participants in the original real world were paid $1 ,400 for the entire set, so not very expensive.

[190] And the argument made to the participants was we are going to pay you not in dollars and cents, but we're going to pay you in attention and fame.

[191] Yes, this was the genius discovery in a way.

[192] It's one way of putting it, is that as opposed to shelling out for a big salary, especially for a famous actor, you could instead get so -called normal, somewhat normal.

[193] people to do it for the idea that they would themselves become celebrities, at least for a little while.

[194] Thousands of people have taken this idea and run with it.

[195] You don't need to be a large corporation anymore to be an attention merchant.

[196] The screens on our desks and in our hands have enabled a new breed of merchants who have found ever more powerful ways to keep us coming back.

[197] That's coming up after the break.

[198] But first, we need a moment to monetize your mind space with some messages from our sponsors.

[199] Yes, we're attention merchants too.

[200] Today we're talking with author Tim Wu about his book The Attention Merchants, The Epic Scramble to Get Inside Our Heads.

[201] Attention merchants are television shows, newspaper articles, and podcasts that draw you in and then sell your attention to advertisers.

[202] The Internet has redefined the notion of what and who an attention merchant can be.

[203] You don't need to be a Fortune 500 company or an advertising behemoth.

[204] You can be someone like Jonah Peretti.

[205] In 2001, the MIT grad student had an idea.

[206] He decided to order some personalized Nike sneakers with the word sweatshop printed on them.

[207] Nike didn't really take to that suggestion.

[208] They rejected it or some employee did as inappropriate slang.

[209] He wrote back and pointed out that sweatshop wasn't slang, that it was in the dictionary.

[210] and they just canceled the order and he wrote a final email saying, well, could you please send me a picture of the 12 -year -old who's making my shoes?

[211] He also went on to write a blog post about his experience or shared this material.

[212] Describe to me what happened and sort of the turn of events that turned this relatively innocuous private interaction into something that was close to a global phenomenon.

[213] Well, Jonah Peretti was here he was in the early 2000s, and he touched a live wire that no one really understood well, which was the tendency of certain stories.

[214] I don't know if it was quite a blog post.

[215] I think he just sent an email out, and the email got forwarded, got forwarded, got forwarded, until millions of people had seen it or read it.

[216] We now call that going viral, but that phrase didn't exist back then.

[217] You know, Jonah told me he then ended up on the, you know, Today's show talking about sweatshops.

[218] The thing blew up.

[219] And, you know, that's something we're kind of more familiar with now.

[220] But at the time, it was a new phenomenon, especially, you know, an unknown person having their email just go viral.

[221] And it showed that there was something new and unusual about this medium, the web and the internet.

[222] Now, Jonah, of course, was not a one -shot wonder.

[223] He went on to do several other things.

[224] In fact, he demonstrated that he had something of a knack for finding things that went viral.

[225] Describe to us some of the websites that most of us have visited that are the brainchild of Jonah Peretti.

[226] Yeah, so Jonah in some ways did a lot to invent our present.

[227] Something about virality fascinated him.

[228] I think he just thought that experience with the shoes was so strange and weird and unexpected that, you know, he went back almost like a scientist to see if he could bottle that lightning.

[229] He founded two websites.

[230] One was the Huffington Post, which he co -founded with other people, including Ariam.

[231] Huffington, which was designed to use these sort of web techniques to push a more left -leaning form of journalism.

[232] And, you know, it was a tremendous success transformed journalism, not all in good ways, but did.

[233] But he even went further and went to the pure distillation of attention with a site name BuzzFeed Laboratories, now known as BuzzFeed.

[234] The only goal of which was the pure harvesting of attention by creating viral stories.

[235] And that BuzzFeed has obviously transform web content today as we know it.

[236] I remember some time ago, Tim, I was watching something that was forwarded to me by a friend, and it showed a video that BuzzFeed had posted where they had a watermelon sitting on a table, and these two people working at BuzzFeed essentially wrapped rubber bands around the watermelon, and they kept doing so until there were probably hundreds of rubber bands.

[237] 6 .708.

[238] 6 .79.

[239] Oh, I see your person.

[240] And the idea was, of course, that at some point the rubber bands would exert enough power on the watermelon to make the watermelon explode.

[241] And you sort of knew this was going to happen, but you didn't quite know when it was going to happen.

[242] And people like me sat and watched this video unfold for, I don't know how long it was.

[243] It might have been even 10 or 12 minutes.

[244] And all this was of people was people putting rubber bands on a watermelon.

[245] And throughout that process, I found myself asking, why is it that I just simply am not able to look away?

[246] And in some ways, it is an act of genius to create content like that.

[247] Yeah, BuzzFeed Laboratories, I think the Laboratories is an important part of the original name, is they just kept experimenting until they found stuff that, for whatever reason, just grab people and wouldn't let it go.

[248] Watermelons with rubber bands, maybe more obvious ones like cat photos, they just people kept coming back.

[249] And, you know, I guess we know more about the human mind as a result of BuzzFeed's experiment on us, although I'm not really sure that we like what we found, or at least we found, that the things we were interested in aren't necessarily reading Tolstoy or something, but are these strange things like the one you mentioned.

[250] Let's talk for a moment about Silicon Valley and the work of companies like Google and Twitter and Facebook.

[251] They have in some ways become masters not just of capturing our attention, but monitoring where our attention goes and building products that, cater to the drift of our attention.

[252] Talk about these new attention merchants, and in some ways there are enormous power over our lives.

[253] Yeah, sure.

[254] A big turning point in the history of humanity came at the end of the last century, the last millennia, when Silicon Valley, headed by Google first really started to get into advertising and turned all the resources, all the know how all the expertise of engineering and computer science to the art and science of capturing as much attention as possible, getting as much data as possible out of people, and reselling it to advertisers.

[255] That has been a change with profound consequences.

[256] I think many or most of us are hooked on one or more online products, which know more about us than anyone else, and frankly are like this incredible supercomputer designed to get as much resellable attention out of us as possible.

[257] I think this is something that goes beyond even what television or radio was capable of doing because they know so much more about us.

[258] They know so much more about you, your vulnerabilities, your desires.

[259] And, you know, customized marketing can really work.

[260] And it's something we really need to watch in this next decade.

[261] Many celebrities have come to understand that attention online translates to money.

[262] I was reading a website the other day.

[263] It was describing the Indian cricket star, Verat Koli, who has nearly 17 million Instagram followers.

[264] And the article said that Verat Koli makes half a million dollars per Instagram post where he promotes a product.

[265] That is just mind -boggling.

[266] It does show the commercial value of attention, which is really what my book is all about.

[267] And it also speaks to the transformation of celebrity.

[268] You know, there was once a point where famous people, you know, say the Queen of England, or a famous scientist.

[269] They sort of tried to stay out of public view.

[270] You know, they usually had jobs other than being celebrities, say, I don't know, Einstein was trying to discover things.

[271] And their mystery seemed to add to the sense of wonder or fame.

[272] That's not our model at all.

[273] Celebrities or aspiring celebrities seek to eke out any minute or second they can get of our attention and stay there, never go away.

[274] And as you suggested, there's commercial reasons to do so that you can, frankly, they make a lot of money not only doing your job, but just by being famous.

[275] You know, I think maybe Paris Hilton gets some credit for the theory of just being famous for being famous for being famous is the phrase.

[276] But certainly a celebrity has transformed in our times.

[277] It isn't just megastars who can monetize their celebrity.

[278] Increasingly, micro -celebrities, often called influencers, are finding there's real money to be made in harvesting the attention of their friends and followers.

[279] Hi, I'm Sue Tran.

[280] I'm currently an associate creative director at Refiner 29 working in the brand and content space.

[281] I also have a micro -large following on Instagram with my Instagram handle, Sue Tran with three ends.

[282] Sue Tran has about 23 ,000 followers on Instagram.

[283] She joined the site five years ago.

[284] Since then, she's built up a following of people interested in food and art around New York City.

[285] Scattered among some 1 ,500 photos are pictures of Yenai.

[286] Yankee candles, portable printers, and most recently, pictures of Sue posing with a Google Pixel smartphone.

[287] Google was actually through an influencer agency.

[288] Influencer marketing agencies has been growing in the last like one or two years just because people want to monetize influential Instagram and bloggers and all that stuff.

[289] So they kind of create a platform to make it easier for influencers to seek out sponsors or sponsors to seek out them.

[290] Sue says companies pay influencers based on the number of followers they have.

[291] I have a rate of 150.

[292] There's a homemade quality to Sue's sponsored posts.

[293] Some of them are obviously a little bit more staged, but I don't think I would ever post anything that I didn't feel like was 100 % me. Companies want these messages to feel like authentic recommendations from one friend to another rather than advertising messages directed by a multi -billion dollar company.

[294] In one picture, Sue poses with her Google phone in front of her building in Brooklyn.

[295] In another, she's holding the phone while sitting in a Chinese restaurant.

[296] To a friend, it might look like she loves her Google phone, but...

[297] Don't tell anyone.

[298] I'm still on my iPhone.

[299] It just indicates a sort of a new type of media environment where, as you suggested, many more people can be famous, not in the older traditional sense of everyone in America knows your face.

[300] or everyone in the world knows your face, which was the old criteria for People magazine, putting your face on the cover, but that millions of people or hundreds of thousands of people know who you are, and therefore in some smaller way, you were micro or nano -famous.

[301] When we think of celebrities, we think of people most often in movies and on television.

[302] My name is Donald Trump, and I'm the largest real estate developer in New York.

[303] You have a particular interpretation, Tim, of how the apprentice led to Donald Trump's election as president.

[304] Yes.

[305] I think that Donald Trump, through the apprentice, and to some degree other parts of his life, understood deeply the power of capturing and using human attention.

[306] Now, on the apprentice, I think he studied what it takes to capture an audience, some of these things we talked about, BuzzFeed, the sort of plot twists, the unusual, surprising behavior.

[307] And I think he has, in his presidency, and during his campaign saw it as his primary directive to always win the battle for attention.

[308] Sometimes even losing or appearing to lose, it doesn't matter as long as there's a good show, a big fight, and everyone's paying attention to me. In his mind, he thinks he's won.

[309] And to some degree, it is truer than any of us would like to admit.

[310] At some deep level, there's some genius to it, understanding that the battle for attention is primary to a lot of other battles.

[311] You know, the whole country, and to some degree the world, is reacting to his agenda, his presence, his tweets, everything he does.

[312] That's also known as power.

[313] You know, even if people are resisting you, they're still paying attention to you.

[314] And so, you know, the mental resources of the entire nation, much of the world, have been devoted to this one figure, Mr. Donald Trump.

[315] You say that because Trump is an attention merchant, his biggest vulnerability might not be the risk of impeachment, but the risk that people will eventually get bored.

[316] of him.

[317] Talk about that idea that one of the risks of being an attention merchant is that people will eventually start to tune you out.

[318] Yes, I think this happens with all advertising, almost all content and many celebrities with a few exceptions, is we have some innate tendency to get bored, get used to things, develop some immunity.

[319] You know, even a hit show like I Love Lucy eventually lost its audience.

[320] And so much as Donald Trump rose to power on an intentional move, you know, almost running his campaign and presidency as a reality show.

[321] I think when people begin getting bored, begin tuning out, you can expect a loss of power.

[322] He may fade less in the way of Richard Nixon and more in the way of Paris Hilton.

[323] When you step back and look at this long arc of how attention merchants have captured our attention and monetized it and sold it and found ways to figure out what works and what doesn't work, are there broad patterns that emerge about human nature and human psychologists?

[324] Are there lessons to be drawn about how the mind works from the story of the attention merchants?

[325] Yeah, I think there are.

[326] So, first of all, there's lessons as to how we decide what to pay attention to.

[327] It's a mixture of voluntary and involuntary mechanisms.

[328] The science suggests, and I think the history suggests it's true.

[329] So we like to think we control what we pay attention to, but in fact, we can sort of be conditioned or involuntary.

[330] attracted to things.

[331] Have you ever found yourself, you know, clicking on Facebook and wondering why did I do that?

[332] Or if you ever find yourself, you know, startled by an ad and watching it, not sure what got you there, you'll know that it's not fully within our voluntary control.

[333] Part of this book is motivated by a deep interest in human freedom and, you know, a sense that we can lose our freedom and become entrapped really by doing what we think are voluntary choices.

[334] I mean, I don't have to read email.

[335] I don't have to be, you know, writing tweets or something.

[336] Nonetheless, these voluntary choices in a certain environment can leave one trapped.

[337] Another motivation for this book is the experience, which I'm sure many of listeners will have had, where you go to your computer and you have the idea you're going to write just one email, and you sit down and suddenly an hour goes by, maybe two hours, and you don't know what happened.

[338] You know, this sort of surrender of control over our lives, the loss of control, to me, it speaks deeply to this challenge of freedom and what it means to be a autonomous in our time and have a life where you've sort of, to some degree, chosen what you want to do.

[339] These are values that seem to me underthreaten our times.

[340] So there's been a war for our attention for a very long time, at least a century, probably much longer than that.

[341] Are we just helpless victims in this war where, you know, people are waging, you know, this battle for our attention?

[342] Is there a way that we can, in some ways, take back this battlefield and own our own minds again?

[343] Yeah, this is, as you said, something only a century old.

[344] You know, advertising 100 years ago was just getting started.

[345] So we're in a relatively new over the course of human civilization environment, and I think we can adapt.

[346] We still have our individuality and ultimately some choice.

[347] Now, the challenge is that we face an industry which has spent a century inventing and developing techniques to get us hooked, to harvest as much attention as possible.

[348] And they're good at it.

[349] But we do have choices.

[350] And I think it begins with the idea that attention is a resource, that you own it, and that one should be very conscious about how it's being spent.

[351] I was motivated writing this book by the work of William James, the philosopher.

[352] And he pointed out something very straightforward, which is, you know, at the end of your days, your life will have been what you paid attention to.

[353] And so the size of the science.

[354] And so the how that vital resource is spent, in my view, is the key to life, frankly, the key to meaning, the key to doing and having a life which you think is meaningful.

[355] Tim Wu is a professor at Columbia Law School.

[356] He is the author of The Attention Merchants, The Epic Scramble to get inside our heads.

[357] Tim, thank you for joining me today on Hidden Brain.

[358] Yeah, thank you so much.

[359] This week's show was produced by Path Shah and edited by Tara Boyle.

[360] Our team includes Maggie Penman, Jenny Schmidt, Raina Cohen, and Renee Clare.

[361] Our unsung heroes this week are Enzo Doran and Trey Warman.

[362] You heard these two young gentlemen at the beginning of the episode.

[363] Extra, extra.

[364] Read all about it.

[365] Great astronomical discoveries lately made.

[366] And we greatly appreciate their voice acting work.

[367] Great astronomical discoveries lately made.

[368] Astronomical.

[369] Astronomical discoveries lately made.

[370] Yellow.

[371] Great astronomical.

[372] Do it again, but don't forget discoveries.

[373] For more Hidden Brain, you can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

[374] From all of us here at the show, we wish you a happy New Year.

[375] If you're looking for a New Year's resolution, I have a suggestion for you.

[376] Recommend Hidden Brain to as many friends and family members as you can in 2018.

[377] I'm Shankar Vedantam, and this is NPR.